Nasa: Earth is warming at a pace 'unprecedented in 1,000 years'

a reply to: Krazysh0t


you never answered my question dude

originally posted by: DocScurlock1774
a reply to: Krazysh0t


you never answered my question dude

This thread is 8 pages long and you just replied to a post that didn't reference you, how about repeating it?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
That does not mean the 'true value' is the median of that range. It means the 'true value' exists somewhere in that range. We could have actually cooled slightly (although I doubt that). In other words, this is just another scare tactic based on spinning statistical data.
TheRedneck

It's the data that is the problem, I do not believe for one minute that the raw data itself is any more truthful than the man in the Moon, never mind all the manipulations and algorithms that are shoved into Schmidts models.

Take a look at these two samples, the first one classed as best sited, in California and in place for over a hundred years with little environmental change,





Just look at the differences in the visual settings, how the second picture is obviously now in an unsuitable environment....then compare their graphs over the last 90-100years. The Californian one has actually decreased markedly in temp readings, while the Marysville one below, classed as poor, or very poor has increased quite dramatically.




files.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't care what anyone says, there's no fancy computer algorithm that can sort out those two to get even a smidging of a mean, never mind any parameter of true.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

someones got their panty's in a bunch this morning, any way, how did they take temp 1000 years ago?

originally posted by: DocScurlock1774
a reply to: Krazysh0t

someones got their panty's in a bunch this morning,

any way, how did they take temp 1000 years ago?

I see... Early morning insults... Well I guess I won't answer your question after all. I gave you an honest shot to remind me about something I missed, but if you are going to be snippy then it isn't worth it. Go google it yourself.

a reply to: Darkblade71 you are claiming your particular latitude, longitude , time, and your perceptions generalize to the entire planet. How can you even take the time to write that and post it.

a reply to: smurfy

That's essentially what the report I linked was referring to. The temperature stations are poorly maintained and barely monitored, leading to uncertainties that negate the accuracy of the measurements. They just had to go about it in a different manner, probably to avoid being defunded.

Personally I like your straightfowardness better.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Hmm...scientists are giving us warnings based on data.
But thats not how half the people in murica think..gotta ask them what corporations and some politicians think to counter it.
heh

...seriously though, we're screwed.

Who is gonna tell China and India to stop polluting..or tell westerners to eat less meat and drive less, etc.

We need an active global discussion on technology to counter our lifestyles. thats the only way humans will get ahold of the damage they cause.

How about Global Thermal Nuclear War !!

that would solve alot of things Wouldn't it Especially the over Burden Population ..

cut down to a Mere global size of 500 million ...

So we have just Radiation and Plastic

Fallout series for Real..

Vaults are being made and had been made ! Norway has the Deep underground Seed Storage Switzerland
has the Blood ( DNA ) Bank ... its all Good we are being stored , and Iron Mountain has some Valuables Saved too ..

time to make a Generation hold Tank Space Station ...

This Planet is Beyond FUBAR...
save the Planet!! ???

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: gmoneystunt
Human-caused climate change based on CO2 emissions is not good science, it is great political theater. But that is another subject best understood by following the money and there is a lot of it.

Yes, indeed, let's follow the money.

Money made from mining, selling and burning fossil fuels over 200 years: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ x 10^10.

Money made from geophysical studies of radiation balance, atmospheric and oceanic physics: c


John D. Rockefeller was the first (inflation adjusted) trillionaire. How did he make his money?

a reply to: Bearack

"It's not that they are new, but more so enlightened. Flint and many other cities have historically used lead pipes for water. It was the means of how Flint change the flow that forces contaminants (rocks and such) into the piping that then caused an massive increase of lead into the water."

I would not know that info if you had not informed me. Are you super smart or did the right people know that info too before they turned the water on? Like, our elected leaders should know that massive infrastructure to replace aging metal and woods has to done sooner or later. We elect them because we expect some kind of intelligent foresight that will keep us all safer. They are afraid of the money it will take to really protect our country from the coming changes.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

well if google says so then it must be right.

Yes we are having a negative effect on the climate but there is some societal need for it at this time and despite what you've been told climate change is not man made. We are only one force of many. As such it is extremely unlikely that we've broken the climate to the point that the trend is now only upwards forever. That makes no sense. At some point other factors will shift and outweigh the impact we have made. Nature has a funny way of doing that. Ideally we'll have moved to renewable energy, started mining off-world, and stopped making # out of wood long before that happens but it should not be forced. It will happen naturally with the progression of technology. Imagine the world in 200 years? If you can't do that because you think humans will be extinct because "global warming" your god broke your brain. If we are all dead the most likely reason will be war.

a reply to: Kandinsky



Full information at : Scientific American - Sun Shade

I think this would be a GREAT opportunity for scientists and governments around the world to come together to save the planet.


(Rose Colored Glasses)

A girl can dream, right?

- AB

originally posted by: DupontDeux

Nasa: Earth is warming at a pace 'unprecedented in 1,000 years'

Well that's a mighty short timespan.

(the period covers the last 0.00000002% of the Earth's existence.)

Also, it means that it is not unprecedented. What happened following the other times it rose at this pace? For how long should the pace continue to be unprecedented?

There are a few factors you and everyone else who use this whole 'the earth is much older than us' and 'the earth has been warmer before' arguments never take into account.

• The earth has never had 7 billion people ransacking it before
  
• The current level of population requires a specific set of climatic parameters in order to be able to grow the crops and farm the animals it needs to feed itself
  

Therefore, even if you are correct we are still headed for disaster.

Yes, it is true that the earth was a lot warmer at one point in it's history. It was known as the time of mega fauna. But guess what, the earth cooled and they all died out due to climate change. Guess what is on the cards for us too?

The warming issue has three major death cards up it's sleeve

• Oceans are rising. Most of the world's biggest cities are located on seaboards or rivers (shipping ports) Hurricane Katrina's devastation in New Orleans will become a regular occurence in cities around the world.
  
• Unstable and changing climate conditions meaning growing crops is not reliable any more. This will get worse as the below issue ramps up
  
• A growing shortage of fresh water due to several factors including increased farming activity, drought, industry, pollution and larger numbers of humans
  

A big space sun shade is needed.
Or we cull 95% of us.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Is that why the second half of August was so dang cool down in southeast Texas this year, and last summer didn't even see 100°F even once?

a reply to: filthyphilanthropist

Two words for you;

Polar blasts. As the ice caps at the poles melt and they get warmer, the frigid air once contained up there is heading down toward the equators. 

You've surely seen the media coverage on the meandering jet stream?

a reply to: smurfy

I agree. Global Warming is just a bunch of PC alarmists being PC and sounding a false alarm (and making bank in the process).

This summer has been the mildest I can ever remember. It was very pleasant. Everyone talking about the weather has said, "It couldn't be nicer outside today." No one was complaining about it being too hot (except for some friends down in Texas who don't like paying state tax.

a reply to: slider1982

Jeremy Clarkson 😂

People need to stop conspiring and face the facts. People dedicate their whole lives to doing research and learning the science behind everything. These scientists are all normal people like you and me, so why would they ALL lie and try to push an agenda?

It's like saying how I'm going to college for computer science, but once I graduate and actually have a degree, everything I know about computers is suddenly a big lie?

Science denial is a dangerous thing. We need to wise up.